BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 27 Jan 07 - 01:25 PM

petr:

A little background for you:

WASHINGTON, June 11, 2003 - Fifty years ago, President Dwight Eisenhower suggested that nuclear technology should be used to help others develop peaceful uses for atomic energy, provided that the recipients of this technology agree not to use it for military purposes. His vision led to the creation of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and IAEA safeguards later gave rise to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime, enshrined in the Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), which came into force in March of 1970....

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 27 Jan 07 - 02:07 PM

I would not encourage a "path to citizenship" for immigrants here illegally, and would not encourage additional immigration. It seems to me that the overall problem is population growth, globally, and anything that can be done to discourage such growth should be encouraged.

       President Eisenhower, looking back, seemed to have a much firmer grasp of reality than the political leadership America has been able to muster since that time.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 27 Jan 07 - 06:12 PM

good does the US agree to use nuclear power for non-military purposes Dicky?

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 27 Jan 07 - 06:16 PM

Ringenslinger--

It's a done deal. 12 million illegal immigrants are here now. You have a choice--either a path to citizenship--or they will never come out of the shadows.   They would have no incentive to get things like insurance--if they drive. Would you like to be hit by an illegal immigrant without insurance? And if they were citizens they would pay taxes--as of now they can use emergency rooms--which your taxes pay for. And on and on.

And if there it were possible for more immigrants to enter the US legally, the border patrol could concentrate on what it should be doing---stopping drugs entering the country, stopping possible terrorists--and not wasting their time--and your money--trying to stop people coming in who want to do jobs Americans don't want.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 27 Jan 07 - 06:23 PM

"And if it were possible for..."

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 27 Jan 07 - 10:51 PM

Ron, I'll address you comments in reverse order.

       I don't think the border patrol should bother with drugs. Their business is immigration. If they concentrated on people, they'd be more apt to catch a terrorist if one should pop up there.

       Drugs should be legalized, totally. If they weren't illegal, they would have very little value, and nobody would bother bringing them into the country.

       Illegal aliens do not do jobs Americans don't want to do. They do jobs for wages Americans can't afford to work for. They also do a lot of jobs that simply don't need doing. People in California used to mow their own lawns.

       And it's not a done deal. The authorities need to go after people who hire illegals. In my book, the board of directors of Tyson Foods ought to be in jail. If you made it impossible for illegals to find work here, they'd quickly discover it's cheaper to live in Mexico, or wherever, and go home.

       Frankly, I don't care if they carry insurance or not. If they are not allowed to have drivers licenses, they should be stopped for driving without one, and if they don't have proof of insurance, get them out of the country.

       The one piece of legislation that does need to be passed, is a measure clarifying that segment of the 14th Amendment that allows children born in this country to be granted automatic citizenship. If that were done, a whole bunch of illegals would quit showing up at the emergency rooms.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 02:00 AM

ptr: "good does the US agree to use nuclear power for non-military purposes Dicky?"

If the US did not have any nuclear capacity and another country was going to provide it to the US then the US might have to agree to such. But when the US is providing it to another country, I think it has every right to put conditions on the deal.

Remember Bubba Clinton's deal with North Korea?

Here is some background material. The situation does not parallel the Iran situation but it bears reading.

I am not your enemy am I?

Ringslinger.

I am with you on illegal immigrants. Bush is wrong to advocate Amnesty.

Also his decision to ignore the fact that his two appointees put 2 border agents in prison while the illegal alien drug smuggler got amnesty which allows him to sue for $5 mil, Sucks.

Too bad his ranch is not on the border.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Stu
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 05:30 AM

The whole question of illegal immigration exposes another of capitalism's many faults.

The people who are coming to your country, whom you talk about in such inpersonal terms are attracted there (and here in the UK as woth the rest of Western Europe) by the lifestyle advertised by our societies - they want to buy into the 'American Dream' or simply a better life. The one advertising says they can get in America or Europe. - they see big cars, iPods and all the other consumerist junk we spend our lives accumulating and they think I'll make them happy.

And whose to say they're wrong? Many of these people live in utter poverty. Their governments either can't look after them or don't care. These people cannot get drugs for their sick children as large drug companies won't release the licences. People struggling for food see a nation of lard-arses and realise there is more than anough to go around if you're on the right side of the fence.

"If they concentrated on people, they'd be more apt to catch a terrorist if one should pop up there."

Do you actually believe this? That terrorists are infiltrating the US in the guise of poor south americans? Is the the rationalé for having armed civilain militas patrolling your southern borders? Have the Neo-cons so managed to scare the shit out of the US population they buy into this sort of rubbish and they will believe anything they are told?

I find some of the talk here disturbing - a fortress mentality that from the outside looks isolationist at best but has far more sinister undertones. Here in the UK the demonisation of 'Asylum Seekers' as they are called is a product of far-right propaganda (which does appear in some sections of the mainstream press), and carries racist connotations.

But this illustrates the ultimate failure of capitalism, the fact we cease to consider our fellow human beings with compassion - people trying to get a better life become 'them' - the unnamed enemy - the hordes amassing around our borders ready to destroy our cosy little worlds.

Economic migration is going to be one of the greatest problems facing the Western world in this century, and unless we are willing to embrace ideologies other than materialism and consumerism, and unless we begin to consider those who want the same quality of life the priviliged west enjoys with understanding and compassion.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Stu
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 05:31 AM

Gawd my spelling is awful. Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 09:17 AM

Stigweard, I must have stated it badly. No, I don't think many people fear terrorists crossing the southern border. But the poor people crossing there, I think, are a bigger threat to the planet, in the long run, than the terrorists.

       I would probably feel differently about it if the populations in the countries they are coming from was going down.

       It's not.

       We have people migrating from places that are hopelessly over crowded, to places that are not-quite-yet overcrowed. That's the problem.

       The Neo-Cons, depending on how you describe them, are perfectly happy to allow this migration to continue. Human life is perfectly expendable to them. They welcome Latino Immigrants into the armed services. In fact, a number of the recruits are coming from that segment of the population at this point in time.
       I don't think you can talk too much about Neo-Cons without getting into the welfare of Israel, however, so I won't go on with this.

       And I agree with you completely. Economic migration is probably the biggest concern of the Western World, now and into the future, and probably the entire world as events move forward.

       Compassion, it seems to me, could best be put into play by helping under-developed nations improve conditions at home, so the most talented members of their societies are not encouraged to leave.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 09:34 AM

As a case in point, I heard on the radio the the population of Nairobi, Kenya is well over 2 million people, but there is no water distribution or sewer system there.
         If you had a rapidly rising population under conditions like that--and I think they have--it's a perscription for disaster.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 11:18 AM

Ringinslinger--

You are showing disturbing tendencies of xenophobia. The root of it is what you have noted--any child born in the US is automatically a citizen. But, far from being a liability, this is a US strength. If you don't believe that, look at France--where, without this provision, there is now a large and growing young underclass, mostly Moslem, who feel they have no stake in the success of France--since they are not now citizens--and it's unclear if they will be.

How many riots by immigrants, first or second generation, has the US experienced recently? And how about France?

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 12:33 PM

I think the riots we are about to experience, Ron, will be conducted by people who are being displaced by immigrants.

             The actual problem, though, didn't seem to develop untl after the 1986 amnesty debacle, when people began to come over the border for the sole purpose of having their child born on the American side.

             Growing populations were a strength at one point in time, like for instance when Napoleon would happily sacrafice thousand of troops to establish even the smallest gain on the battlefield, but things are simply not that way anymore. Too many people is a huge liability. Part of China's economic success has been the result of their "one child" policy. Granted, it has caused other problems, but controlling growth has been economically beneficial.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 12:45 PM

Ringenslinger--


You have a low opinion of Americans' general tendency to dislike civil unrest. Would you participate in such a riot? Or do you know anybody who would?

I think your prediction is hyperbole.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: able
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 12:46 PM

The Achilles heel of democracy is itself. Everyone has an opinion and desparately wants everyone else to accept it. Only 10% of the people are classified as intelligent and everyone still has an opinion, I hate to say it but I suspect we are living in the last days of the western world, if you don't believe me, just have a good long look at tv. That's where the white male is portrayed as a buffoon, idiot and moron. If he is the poor bugger who is the glue on the fabric, then maybe it's time we did throw the towel in. My family lives on both sides of the border(due to some unpleasantness in 1776), even so, I won't comment as if I were an American. But, it does seem to me that people tend to dwell on the negatives and disreguard the small things that are rotting away the society that we live in. People make a country great, people also destroy a country, all we have to do is decide which side of the fence we want to be on and proceed accordingly.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 02:59 PM

It occurs to me to mention this: Every system has an Achilles Heel built into itself by its very nature. This is the same as to say that every system has a given lifetime, just like every living thing does. It begins with much promise, matures to full capability, reaches its glorious prime, and then begins to develop cracks and weaknesses which become much more notable as it ages, until they bring it down. Eventually it passes away and is replaced by something else.

This was true of Egypt, Rome, Greece, Persia, Dacia, Scythia, Thrace, Phoenicia, Sparta, Carthage, Dahea, the Khymers, ancient Imperial China, Imperial Russia, the Soviets, the Aztecs, Imperial Spain, the Napoleonic Empire, the Nazis (who were VERY short-lived!), it was true of anyone you care to name. Their very strengths, when pushed too far became their fatal flaws, and brought them down!

Why should it be any different for us? People are just complaining because they don't like the aging process when it happens on home ground. ;-)

(And I remember well with what casual arrogance my circle of young long-haired friends referred to retirement age people as "old farts" back in the heyday of the 70's....Ha! We have lived to eat our own words.)

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 04:07 PM

Ron, I think we are seeing civil unrest everytime the Minutemen go to the border, or show up at a rally in an effort to influence people. And each time they have a new rally, more people show up. So yes, I think it's happening and it's not hyperbole.

         Re: the rise and fall of empires: when it happened to Rome, China, and Greece, the people involved must have thought--at least to the extent that their life times would let them--that the whole world was changing, either up or down. The difference is, this time it really is the whole world.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 04:14 PM

It's affecting the whole world more than it used to, no doubt about that. And yes, I'm sure that people did think "the whole world" was changing back in those former times, when a major change occurred in their status quo. To the Greeks, for example, Alexander's empire pretty much was the whole world, as they knew it at the time....with some unknown bits lurking out at the edges somewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 06:58 PM

The "Minutemen" had best watch their step--if they break the law, there are enough people on the other side of the issue to see that the law is enforced. Look at the case of the 2 border agents who shot an unarmed man in the back---then covered up the crime. There is sentiment to let them off the hook, since the man they shot was in fact illegal, and a drug smuggler. But to not enforce the law against these 2 agents would send a terrible signal to honest agents who themselves obey the law. And, by the way, the 2 agents appear to be Hispanic---as does the man they shot.

Face it, there are at least 12 million illegals now here---and it is just not smart to deny them a path to citizenship.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 07:43 PM

Well, Ron, we disagree. I think allowing them a path to citizenship after having broken the law in the first place to get here would send a message to everyone from Mexico to Argentina that illegal entry is the way to get what you want.

            I do agree with you, however, on the Minutemen. I've read accounts that some of them are going armed now, and that's the worst mistake they can make. If somebody does get shot, no matter the circumstances, they'll be blamed, and they'd be very had pressed to clear themselves in court.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 08:09 PM

"2 border agents who shot an unarmed man in the back"

One of them shot a fleeing and armed illegal alien drug smuggler that abandoned his van with 743 pounds of marihuana in it and fled on foot for the border, in the ass after a scuffle. Then he picked up his shell casings and did they did not make a report.

The wound was not severe and the illegal alien drug smuggler was still able to get away

The maximum penalty is 6 months suspension for not reporting the discharge of a weapon. He got 12 years and the other border agent got 11

http://rohrabacher.house.gov/news/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=50972

http://www.dailybulletin.com/news/ci_4141562

"I shot," he said. "But I didn't think he was hit, because he kept running into the brush and then disappeared into it. Later, we all watched as he jumped into a van waiting for him. He seemed fine. It didn't look like he had been hit at all."

Seven other agents were on the scene by that time. Compean had already picked up his shell casings. Ramos did not, though he failed to report the shooting.

"The supervisors knew that shots were fired," Ramos said. "Since nobody was injured or hurt, we didn't file the report. That's the only thing I would've done different."
"Ramos, an eight-year veteran of the U.S. Naval Reserve and a former nominee for Border Patrol Agent of the Year"

Keep on reading It gets better:

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=173258&Disp=14&Trace=on
    Snow followed up after the press briefing by faxing 12 pages of comment about the case of the border guards, including the statement from U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton,

Hmm...Is this, by chance the same Johnny Sutton who is close personal friends with the Bush family? The same Johnny Sutton that was intimately involved in the Bush reelection campaign? And the same Johnny Sutton involved in the House of Death travesty? Come now Mr. Snow, your credibility is already lacking.

http://www.narconews.com/houseofdeath/

In the case of the House of Death mass murder, a piece of that evidence has found it's way into the sunshine.

The complicity of U.S. government law enforcers and prosecutors in the torture and murder of a dozen people at the house at 3633 Parsioneros Street in Juarez has been the subject of continuing Narco News reports since April 2004.

http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2007/1/6/213919/8689
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/userfiles/70/ICE_Letter.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 09:10 PM

Ringenslinger---


If you don't allow them a path to citizenship--which definitely should include an English proficiency test--such that their English can be understood, for instance---you are perpetuating an underground society which will not pay taxes, for instance, but will use services.

They will have--and deserve to have-- medical treatment, for instance. Treatment from emergency rooms is by far the least efficient way to get it--and very expensive for taxpayers. And if they are illegal, that's the way they're likely to get it.

You seem to have the attitude that these immigrants would rather be illegal than legal. I doubt it strongly.

It's unlikely that a flood of poor people from Argentina north will jump at the chance to be illegal immigrants-----if there's a way to do it legally.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 09:13 PM

Ah, my friend Dickey--

RohrbacherHouse as the source.   Right.   Couldn't get any more objective than that. Do you know who Rohrbacher (sp) is?

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 09:31 PM

Dear Ron:

I cited several sources.

One of them was http://rohrabacher.house.gov

It looks like an offical document from the US House of representatives to me. I beleive Rohrbacher is an elected member of the US House of representatives. However the judge and prosecutor were Bush appointees.

Please read the links or not.

If you see anything that is not true let me know.

Usually I read all of the pros and cons and sort out what I believe to be true and what is not. The more I read about this, the dirtier the whole deal looks.


Amicably, cordially and respectfully yours, Dickey

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 09:38 PM

They are coming illegally now, and there are ways to do it legally now.

         It's a lot easier to do it illegally now, especially if we throw up our hands and make them legal every time there are a large number of them. That's what was done in 1986, and that's what Bush is proposing to do now.

          If anything happens to put an illegal alien in jeopardy the ACLU and the Southern Poverty Law Center jump right in the middle of it, in spite of the fact that these people are clearly not Americans.

          Bush, of course, is in it to assure big corporations an endless supply of cheap labor. This drives down the value of labor here, and weakens traditional Democratic constituencies. Though the Dems. seem content to take up the cause of the illegals as well, which probably makes less sense than anything.

          Dana Rohrbacher is trying to get the two agents pardoned. His brother is intrumental in putting out watering stations for illegal crossers. There doesn't seem to be a lot of consistancy on this issue.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 09:57 PM

Dickey--

The unarmed man was an illegal trying to smuggle marijuana into the US. So that makes it just fine to shoot him in the back, eh?   As a fine upstanding US citizen you're feeling nostalgic for the good old days of lynch law, perhaps?

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 10:50 PM

Dear sweet Rd:

You must be a Bushite in sheeps clothing because you are with him and his appointees on this.

Do you believe the agent was unjustified in shooting the illegal alien drug smuggler in the buttocks with a shotgun?

Yes or no?

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 Jan 07 - 11:17 PM

Maybe it's just me, but there seems to be a semantical difference between shooting him in the back and shooting him in the ass.

          I didn't realize the agent was using a shotgun. You've got to wonder what size of shot they use. I don't know how they could have shot the guy with a shotgun and not have known he'd been hit.

          Still, it seems to me the agents were punished way beyond any kind of infraction they might have been guilty of.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 01:16 AM

Technically it was in the back up his ass. It is hard to shoot somebody in the front of their ass.

The agent thought he missed because the guy just kept running and escaped in a van that was waiting for him.

I was under the impression that police were allowed to shot at someone that is escaping, resisting arrest by fleeing. Not necessarily to kill but to disable them.

If they are facing the police, the police are not allowed to shoot unless threatened with a gun. The agent thought he saw a gun. Do they have to wait until they are shot before they can shoot?

They seem to be of Latin heritage so it was not racial and one of them was nominated for agent of the year.

They were railroaded or made examples for some unknown reason and the smuggler was given immunity in return for nailing them and now he is suing for $5 million.

Maybe Roherbach is a crook but if you read those links you will be surprised.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 09:57 AM

Dickey---


Bushite--not likely, Even Bush--like a broken clock--can be right once in a while. And I have said before that he is right to pursue a path to citizenship for all illegal immigrants. This is not "amnesty"----and need not be an easy path. But they must have an opportunity to become citizens. Any other choice is totally stupid--or un-American------or both.

Perhaps, to get rid of the illegals, you would like to sanction a huge increase in government spending (as a good conservative?) to vastly increase the Border Patrol-- or perhaps a network of informers (a la Gestapo). Or perhaps you prefer vigilante justice--the "Minutemen" being empowered to apprehend anybody they feel should be arrested?

If not, exactly how would you like to deal with the problem?

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 10:57 AM

Dickey--I checked out the websites. I have no reason to think Roherbach is a crook. I think he's radically misinformed on a number of things, but not a crook.

          I agree completely that the border patrol agents were simply doing what they thought to be their job, and they were blindsided by political elements who have an agenda, but who are not disposed to let the general public know exactly what that agenda really is at this time.

          The Minutemen are not engaged in vigilante justice, because when they see an illegal border crosser, they simply report the sighting to the authorities, much like anybody else might report a hit and run accident or a mugging.

          Again, I think Bush is wrong on this issue. The solution is to come down hard--very, very hard--on the employers of illegal aliens. Once we see a few CEO's in jail, the problem will begin to go away.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 29 Jan 07 - 11:24 PM

":A few CEO's in jail...." Dream on. I have no particular affection for Home Depot or Walmart--to name 2 possible targets--but to envision their CEO's--or any others-- in jail for hiring illegal immigrants is, shall we say, a stretch. Politically, ain't gonna happen.

On to Plan B. Hope you have one.

Furthermore, be careful what you wish for--you may get it. If all 12 million illegals went back to "country of origin" overnight, you'd be hard hit financially---inflation would go through the roof. Good to know that wouldn't bother you. Or don't you think it would happen?

There is no solution which would be fair--or practical--other than a gradual process making these illegals citizens.





Also, regarding the case of the illegal immigrant smuggling marijuana into the US---you're absolutely right there are "political elements who have an agenda". But these "elements" are your boys--Tancredo, Rohrabacher, et al.

The agents who shot at Aldrate-Davila, the illegal in question, knew they had broken a number of border patrol policies. So they gathered shell casings, discarded them in a ditch, and filed a false report.

As the US Attorney for the area put it, the agents "shot 15 times at an unarmed man who was running away from them and posed no threat. They lied about what happened, covered up the shooting, conspired to destroy the evidence, and then proceeded to make up and file a false report." Why is this not so?

Are these agents above the law--since you don't like their target?

If you let these agents off the hook, what message does that send to honest agents? Or perhaps that doesn't bother you.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 02:33 AM

I would like to send them all over to Ron's house and let him support them. He could invite His buddy Bush over to help him out.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 02:58 AM

Dear Mr Bush appologist:

"So they gathered shell casings, discarded them in a ditch, and filed a false report."

The whole Quote is from Johnny Sutton:

"Convictions defended
On the other side, the White House, U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton and other government officials insist that the agents' convictions were justly deserved.

"They shot an unarmed guy who was running away from them," Sutton said Thursday. "They lied about it. They covered it up. They picked up their shell casings. They filed false police reports.""

http://www.narconews.com/Issue38/article1374.html

"A recently retired, high-ranking DEA official is calling on Congress to investigate the role played by a U.S. Attorney in the cover-up of an informant's participation in mass murder in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico.

The DEA official, Sandalio Gonzalez, is pointing the finger squarely at Johnny Sutton, the U.S. Attorney in San Antonio, Texas. He claims that had Sutton taken action sooner in the case, more than a dozen people might still be alive today. As a result, Gonzalez says Congress must act now to get to the bottom of what Sutton knew, and when he knew it."

"U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton Is Plugged Into Power

Johnny Sutton, the U.S. Attorney in San Antonio, Texas, who now finds himself in the hot seat over the ongoing cover-up in the House of Death mass murders, is well connected to the seat of power in this country.

Sutton has close ties to President George W. Bush as well as to U.S. Attorney General and possible Supreme Court candidate Alberto Gonzales – who is no relation to Sandalio Gonzalez, the former high-ranking DEA official who is calling for a congressional investigation of Sutton's actions in the House of Death case.

Veteran DEA agent Gonzalez has accused Sutton of retaliating against him for blowing the whistle on U.S. law enforcers' complicity in the narco-related murders of a dozen people in Ciudad Juárez, Mexico.

Sutton, a former assistant district attorney in Harris County, Texas, hitched his star to the Bush political machine in 1995, when he was named the Criminal Justice Policy Director for then-Governor Bush. He served in that post until 2000, when Bush was elected president. In the wake of Bush's victory, Sutton was named associated deputy attorney general at DOJ in Washington, D.C., and also served as a policy coordinator for the Bush-Cheney presidential transition team.

In late October of 2001, Sutton was appointed by Bush to serve as U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Texas in San Antonio. The U.S. Senate confirmed the appointment a month later.

So Sutton does indeed have friends in high places, including his current boss at the Department of Justice (DOJ).

San Antonio native Alberto Gonzales also skyrocketed into the big time on the coattails of the Bush machine. Like Sutton, Gonzales also practiced law in Harris County (Houston) prior to joining Gov. Bush's staff.

Gonzales served as general counsel and a senior advisor to Gov. Bush while Sutton also was on the governor's staff as a legal advisor. After Bush was elected president in 2000, Gonzales was upgraded to White House Counsel, a position he held until February of this year, when he became the major domo at DOJ – and now is even considered a candidate for the U.S. Supreme Court Justice vacancy being created by Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement.

Despite the allegations about a cover-up in the House of Death case, Attorney General Gonzales recently appointed Sutton to the post of vice chairman of his Advisory Committee of U.S. Attorneys, which plays a key role in determining DOJ policies and programs."

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 03:59 AM

Dear Ron:

The following undercuts your evidence, muddys the water and disproves your case because the trial was unfair:

El Paso Times Article 10/18/2006

"...The problem was that the jurors were under the impression that a hung jury was not an option. Gourley, a special education teacher, and Torres said that the foreman of the jury told them that Cardone would not accept a hung jury. Woods said she heard the same statement but could not remember which juror said it.

"Essentially, when they saw they could not convince the majority in favor of voting guilty, they conceded their votes, believing that they did not have the option to stick to their guns and prevent a unanimous verdict," Stillinger wrote in the motion.

Gourley said he thought the foreman was relating something he heard directly from the judge and when he found no mention on hung juries in the court's printed instructions, "I had no reason to doubt the foreman," he wrote.

After the trial, Gourley told the media that he felt pressured by other jurors who wanted to resume their normal lives after more than two weeks of trial. He also said he thought 10 years in prison was a grossly inappropriate punishment for the agents.

"Had we had the option of a hung jury, I truly believe the outcome may have been different," he said.

The third juror, Woods, wrote, "I don't remember exactly what it was that made me change my vote to guilty on these charges, but I know I was very influenced by my belief, based on the other juror's statement, that we could not have a hung jury. I think I might not have changed my vote to guilty if I had known that was an option."...."

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 07:28 AM

Where did they find jurors who were that stupid?

          As far as political elements who want to see these illegal aliens become citizens, so far this discussion has completely ingnored the other side, La Raza (the race), Lulac, the Mexican-American Legal Defense Fund (MALDF), the Souther Poverty Law Center (which never made any sense to me) and the more militant groups like The Nation of Aztlan.

          These groups want to increase their political base for the sole purpose of bringing more power to themselves. The George W. Bushites simply want an endless supply of cheap labor, while at the same time bringing down the value of traditional American labor.

          Left leaning political groups think they will develop into allies like Lorreta Sanchez, who herself would probably join the militants if their numbers increased.

          As far as the economic inflation element of the whole thing, I think it's greatly overblown. There were people lined up to take the jobs left by the people who were deported after the Swift raids, and the last time I was in Fresno, CA, there was a firm that sole grape harvesting machines that was going out of business. Nobody would buy them because the value of labor was just too cheap.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 01:27 PM

The Achilles Heel of the west are the nuclear power plants.

In the US this week the NRC allowed the nuke corporations to pass the buck/cost of security onto the federal goverment. Too bad airlines didn't get that deal.

What this means is that no defense or security will be forthcoming for US nuclear plants.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 30 Jan 07 - 02:23 PM

I agree with Slinger that GWB and the Republicans want cheap labor for their big business campaign contributors so they allow the invasion to continue, underfund the INS and the Border Patrol, handcuff them so they can't stop the invasion. They send the National guard symbolically and won't allow them to guard anything, just watch the invasion.

The Democrats want more votes from Latinos so they to buddy up to the Illegals with promises of amnesty and citizenship.

Why not spend those billions for the fence on enforcement of the existing laws.

It's all lose/lose.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 31 Jan 07 - 10:21 AM

What amazes me the most are the "so called" environmentalists. The driving element behind population growth in North America is immigration, and illegal immigrants and their offspring are the biggest part of that, yet most of the people who claim to be concerned about the environment are the same folks we find championing the cause of the illegal immigrants.

       It seems like a pretty simple equation to me:
More people = more demand on resources.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 Jan 07 - 12:19 PM

So? The environment doesn't stop at the border.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: pdq
Date: 31 Jan 07 - 01:19 PM

The extinction of plant and animal species in Mexico is just as tragic as the extinction of US species. Trouble is, specific areas in southern California and southeastern Arizona are absolutely unique. These habitats are being destroyed by the population explosion, almost entirely from Mexico. There are invertebrate species that are already extinct, ones we have never even found or named. Discussions by Northeast US residents about bird habitats and reduction in the population of large mammals seems to ring hollow, when the same people have nothing to say about plant habitat destruction or invertebrate extinction. No big eyes, no Bambi Syndrome.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 31 Jan 07 - 03:01 PM

Yes, of course, the environment doesn't stop at the border, but an American citizens ability to do anything about it is, at least, diminished once it crosses the border.

         And pdq makes a good point. Everybody seems to be concerned about polar bears right now, but the food chain runs both ways. Invertebrate species are just as important as any other in the big picture, just not as noticable.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 31 Jan 07 - 03:07 PM

speaking of the environment and the border - whatever happened to all the water from the Colorado river and how much of it gets to Mexico.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 Jan 07 - 03:17 PM

Well, you're right about that, guys (pdq and Rinslinger). The problem is simply the age-old one recently expressed by Chongo:

"Almost everyone moves mainly in emotional directions. They cherrypick whatever facts or rumours they can find that support their emotional biases. They ignore or deny or dance around the edges of what don't support 'em.

And the really funny bit is this: they ALL think they are bein' totally objective while they do it.

Chimps, I am sorry to say, are much the same. Gorillas are even worse."

Liberals and conservatives are both equally guilty of this habit, and you will find them both sending very contradictory messages with their comments on a variety of hot issues.

To put it another way: Unconscious hypocrisy and conflicted thinking is everywhere, but people don't normally notice it unless it's being done by someone else that they disagree with about something. ;-) They absolutely don't notice it when they themselves are doing it...unless they have gained through much life experience a keen and wry awareness of human foibles, including their own. Mark Twain, for example, was so good at spotting that kind of thing that I suspect he could even catch himself doing it and laugh.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 31 Jan 07 - 04:50 PM

Of course, cherrypicking facts is a little different than cherry picking rumour--like, say, yellow-cake uranium from Niger.

          And people who are doing this in what they consider to be the best interest of the public, have a little higher ground to stand on, it seems to me, than people who are doing if for profit. Like meat packers who hire illegals to they don't have to pay payroll taxes and livable wages.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 31 Jan 07 - 04:56 PM

I would tend to agree.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 31 Jan 07 - 09:22 PM

Ringenslinger--

"meatpackers they don't have to pay payroll taxes and livable wages....." However if you were in favor of these illegals getting livable wages, you'd be in favor of their becoming US citizens--then they could not be exploited as easily.

So then you agree with me that these illegals should be given a path to citizenship--without leaving the US. Right?

Since, after all, you're only interested in their welfare. Right?



Dickey--

Regarding the case of Mr. Aldrate-Davila. I note with interest that while you try to impugn the reliability of Mr. Sutton (with no proof), you do not deny the truth of what he said about this case. Your character assassination of Mr. Sutton will do no good. After all, he's not alleging he saw the entire incident. But an honest agent turned the other two in.

If you don't agree with the truth of what Mr. Sutton said, exactly what part of his statement do you take issue with?

Let's have some specifics.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 31 Jan 07 - 09:27 PM

pdq--


Oops, your hypocrisy seems to be showing. Would you care to tell us how a wall between the US and Mexico would help plant and animal species? Or are you against the wall? (In which case, my humble apologies--and welcome to the world of reasonable people.)

But please enlighten us. Inquiring minds need to know.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: Ron Davies
Date: 31 Jan 07 - 09:33 PM

As I've said before, a much better approach would be to gradually make the 12-million-plus illegal immigrants-- we now have--US citizens. And to make legal immigration much more available than it is now. That would cut down on mad dashes through ecologically sensitive areas.

Subject: RE: BS: Western Democracy's Achilles Heel
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 01 Feb 07 - 02:26 AM

Ron:

I have no objections to his statement.

I don't believe they had a fair trial.

Do you believe they had a fair trial?

And I am against building that wall. We need to spend the money on hiring the personel to enforcing the existing laws, process immigrants, speed up the imigration process and increase the quotas.